Alana Miller – Northeast District Manager

Eliminating Risk of PFAS in Groundwater

AGENDA

• PlumeStop – Groundbreaking Technology Development

• Manipulating Retardation Factor and Environmental Risk

• Treatment Strategies

• Case Studies

• Other Services We Provide

COLLOIDAL ACTIVATED CARBON

• Size (1–2 µm)• 2-3 OoMs smaller than GAC (500-1,000

µm)

• Size of a red blood cell

• Suspended in water

• Huge surface area

• Extremely fast sorption

COLLOIDAL ACTIVATED CARBON

• Additives• Allow for suspension without clumping

• Enable wide-area, low-pressure distribution

• Particles coat the surface of aquifer matrix

• No impedance of groundwater flow

• Converts polluted aquifer into purifying filter

PLUMESTOP – REAGENT DISTRIBUTION

PLUMESTOP – REAGENT DISTRIBUTION

Powdered Activated Carbon

X

PLUMESTOP – REAGENT DISTRIBUTIONSEM image of Sand Particles Without PlumeStop

PLUMESTOP – REAGENT DISTRIBUTIONSEM image of sand particles coated with PlumeStop

PLUMESTOP – REAGENT DISTRIBUTIONSEM Image of Sand Particles Coated with PlumeStop

PLUMESTOP LIQUID ACTIVATED CARBON

TYPICAL PERFORMANCE OF PLUMESTOP

• 98% reduction in 1 month

• Minimal CVOC daughter products observed

• Sustained reductions over time

Back Diffusion Management

AQUIFER FLUX ZONES

Higher Permeability Zones“Freeways”

AQUIFER FLUX ZONES

Lower Permeability Zones“Parking Lots”

BACK DIFFUSION

Relatively Easy to Remediate Contaminants in the Freeways

IMPACT OF BACK DIFFUSION

PLUMESTOP TREATMENT

Contaminant Mass Back-Diffusing From the Low-Perm Zones is Captured

PLUMESTOP INJECTION

PLUMESTOP ELIMINATES BACK-DIFFUSION IMPACT

PASSIVE MANAGEMENT OF GROUNDWATER PLUMESLONG-TERM

WHICH BRINGS US TO…

Perfluorinated Compounds

PLUMESTOP + PFOA/PFOS

Sorption only (currently no validated destruction methods are available)

PLUMESTOP + PFOA/PFOS: CAPTURE EFFICIENCYSo what happens over time?

• Won’t the barrier eventually fill up and breakthrough?

• As PFAS do not degrade, the answer is yes

• What’s important is how long this will take

PLUMESTOP + PFAS: RETARDATION FACTORFor a PlumeStop Barrier at a Mid-Range Dose:

PFOA• The R of a 1,000 µg/L plume is 80• The R of a 100 µg/L plume is 570• The R of a 10 µg/L plume is 4,000

PFOS • The R of a 1,000 µg/L plume is 375• The R of a 100 µg/L plume is 2,000• The R of a 10 µg/L plume is 10,000

*based on individual components

PLUMESTOP + PFAS: RETARDATION FACTORExample:

• PlumeStop barrier width 16’ (single application at mid-range dose)

• 160’ per year seepage velocity

• 100 µg/L influent concentration

• Groundwater transit time 36.5 days

• PFOA transit time* = 20,800 days (57 years)

• PFOS transit time* = 73,000 days (200 years)

* transit time peak based on individual components

At lower influent concentrations, the retardation quickly becomes much greater.

This is at 100 µg/L

ELIMINATE THE RISK FROM PFAS

Environmental RISK = (Hazard) X (Exposure)PFAS

ELIMINATE THE RISK FROM PFAS

• “Risk-Based Corrective Action” is commonplace throughout world since 1990’s

• “No Further Action” granted if plume not expanding and no receptor impacted (water well or surface water)

Application Strategies

STRATEGY #1 – SIMPLE PLUMECUT-OFF BARRIER

Description

– Single barrier of PlumeStop®

– Limits plume expansion

Application

– Protection of property boundary• (entering site or exiting site)

– Protection of receptor (shown)

• (e.g. water body; well)

– Plume minimization• Liability containment• (possible) regulatory compliance

STRATEGY #2 – SEQUENCE OF BARRIERS

Description

– Multiple barriers of PlumeStop®

– Progressive elimination of plume

Application

– Addresses entire plume

– Utilizes advection for efficiency

– Particularly suited for:

• Large plumes (compare cost of grid injection)

• Built-up areas / restricted access – Barriers in access corridors / roadways

STRATEGY #3 – POTENTIAL SOURCE CONTAINMENT

Description

– Pre-emptive source control

– PlumeStop® in situ ‘berm’

Application

– Ring-fence known potential source

– Avoidance of plume generation

– Provide extra time for emergency response

STRATEGY #4 – LOCALIZED RECEPTOR PROTECTION

Description

– Individual receptor protection

– ‘Brita®’ filter in-ground

Application

– Protection of abstraction wells• (e.g. agricultural)

– Interim measure where plume is large

– Amenable to push-pull application• Fast response• Minimally intrusive• Eliminates requirement for additional borings• Ability to treat deep wells

CASE STUDYPFAS – FORMER FURNITURE FACILITYONTARIO, CANADA

BACKGROUND

Initial Driver: Hydrocarbons• Mixed chain lengths, 100 – 5,000 µg/L

Formation• Silty sand – till based with sand seams

• Water at 3 – 5’ below grade

Former Fire Training Area• History of furniture manufacturing

• PFAS tested for just in case and found!

O N T A R I O

Rick McGregor

PLUME AREA DIAGRAM

EXTENT OF PFAS AND PFOA CONTAMINATION PRE-TREATMENT

PFOAPFOS

PFAS FORMER FURNITURE SITE

Site Location:Ontario, Canada

PFAS FORMER FURNITURE SITE

Site Location:Ontario, Canada

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH AND CALBIBRATION ONGOING• Involved in independent PFAS research

• Modeled contaminant hydrogeology at project site

• Performed sensitivity analysis under a range of Kf values to estimate the longevity of capture

Grant Carey, PhD

RESULTS

Long Term Results

• Modeled (Grant Carey, PhD)• Conservative Analytical Solution

• Mass flux 161 ug/m²/day

• Source half life 30 years

• Source Zone PFOA• Strongly adsorbed

• ~100 years 1x10-6 ng/L

• Source Zone PFOS• Not as strongly adsorbed

• ~100 years ~24 ng/L

COST COMPARISON

Actual Cost of PlumeStop Treatment• Design, product and application (total)• Ongoing system O & M (ex. monitoring)

Estimated Cost of Pumping & Treating (Most Efficient GAC)• Design, permitting, construction, startup• Ongoing system O&M

• (ex. monitoring @ $60k/yr X 20 yrs)

$73,000$0

$73,000

$150,000$1,200,000

$1,350,000

Case Published:

REMEDIATION JournalVolume 28, No. 2Summer 2018Wiley Press

REMEDIATION MAGAZINE

CASE STUDYPFAS – SOLVENT RECOVERY FACILITYCONNECTICUT

Solvent Recovery Services of New EnglandSuperfund Site in CT

• Plume Stop and Aqua ZVI Application to address cVOC and PFAS contamination

• Target combined 5 compounds 70 ppt: PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, PFHpA

• Starting concentration: max 148ppt

• Applied Reagents in Trench and laterals

• Application July 23-25, 2018

• Aqua ZVI: 4,000 lbsPlume Stop: 21,600 lbs

Monitoring Well Locations

Plume Stop Into NTCRA trench and laterals

AEHS Poster 2018 Thompson et.al

Solvent Recovery Services of New EnglandSuperfund Site in CT

• 8,800 lbs of PlumeStop and 4,000 lbs of ZVI into the upgradient trench

• 12,800 lbs of PlumeStop into the downgradient trench (including four 50’ distribution trenches)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

6/20/2018 7/10/2018 7/30/2018 8/19/2018 9/8/2018

Co

nc

(pp

b)

PMP-1 - VOCs

Benzene TCE VC tCEs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

6/20/2018 7/10/2018 7/30/2018 8/19/2018 9/8/2018

PFA

S (p

pt)

PMP-1 - PFAS

PFAS - Ʃ5CT

Results from PMP-1 (within trench)

Ʃ5CT is sum of 5 PFAS compounds (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHpA, and PFHxS)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

6/19/2018 7/9/2018 7/29/2018 8/18/2018 9/7/2018

Co

nc

(pp

b)

EMW-1S - VOCs

Benzene TCE VC tCEs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

6/19/2018 7/9/2018 7/29/2018 8/18/2018 9/7/2018

PFA

S (p

pt)

EMW-1S - PFAS

PFAS - Ʃ5CT

Results from EMW-1S (10 ft downgradient of trench)

Ʃ5CT is sum of 5 PFAS compounds (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHpA, and PFHxS)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

6/19/2018 7/9/2018 7/29/2018 8/18/2018 9/7/2018

PFA

S (p

pt)

EMW-4S - PFAS

PFAS - Ʃ5CT

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

6/19/2018 7/9/2018 7/29/2018 8/18/2018 9/7/2018

Co

nc

(pp

b)

EMW-4S - VOCs

Benzene TCE VC tCEs

Results from EMW-4S (about 50 ft downgradient of trench)

Ʃ5CT is sum of 5 PFAS compounds (PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHpA, and PFHxS)

REGENESIS R&D LABShould we expect GAC and PlumeStop to work the same?

What about the shorter chain PFAS species, will they adsorb to PlumeStop?• Lab studies

• Bench test with groundwater from an Italian site

ACTIVATED CARBON PARTICLE SIZE AND ADSORPTION EFFICACY• Recent study demonstrated 2

OoM improved removal with smaller activated carbon particles• 180–500 mm AC removed 90%

PFOS• <53 mm AC removed 99.9+%

PFOS

• *GAC particles are less efficient at adsorbing PFAS than PlumeStop because of their size

Xiao, Ulrich, Chen & Higgins. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 6342-6351.

PFAS ADSORPTON KINETICS & PARTICLE SIZE• The reason can

be attributed to kinetics: intraparticle diffusion

• Smaller particles provide better access to all the sorption sites that activated carbon provides.

Small and LargeOrganic Molecules

Pores available to both small and large molecule absorption

Pores available only to small molecule absorption Xiao, Ulrich, Chen & Higgins. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 6342-6351.

REGENESIS R&D LABShould we expect GAC and PlumeStop to work the same?

What about the shorter chain PFAS species, will they adsorb to PlumeStop?• Lab studies

• Bench test with groundwater from an Italian site

PLUMESTOP PERFORMANCE SITE WATER BATCH TEST

SUMMARY

• PlumeStop is a Proven Technology• Treatment of CVOCS, Petroleum Hydrocarbons, and PFAS

• Eliminates the RISK of PFAS in groundwater

• Passive Plume Management

• Cost Effective!• Low Cap-Ex• Low Op-Ex

PETROFIX REMEDIATION FLUID

COMPOSITION• Fluid, 400 lbs: 32 % activated carbon + slow-release sulfate

• No transport polymers

• EA Blend, 20 lbs: nitrate/sulfate mix or sulfate salts only• Tech bulletin explaining PetroFix treatment approach

PETROFIX DESIGN ASSISTANT

Design Assistant Lets You:• Track Your Orders• Manage Your Sites• Recommends Designs• Access Helpful Resources• Archive Your Sites

Research &Development

01

04

03

02

Remediation Technologies

Land Science Technologies (VI)

Remediation Services

• Enhanced Aerobic Biodegradation• ORC-Advanced

• Enhanced Anaerobic Biodegradation• 3-D Microemulsion

• In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO)• RegenOx• PersulfOx

• In Situ Chemical Reduction (ISCR)• Chemical Reducing Solution• AquaZVI• MicroZVI

• Bioaugmentation• BDI Plus

• In Situ Sorption and Biodegradation• PlumeStop• PetroFix

• Metals Immobilization• Metals Remediation Compounds (MRC)

REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGY CLASSES:

REMEDIAL APPROACHES OFFERED:

DIRECT PUSH INJECTION

• In-Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO)

• In-Situ Chemical Reduction (ISCR)

• Bioaugmentation

• In Situ Sorption & Biodegradation

• Enhanced Aerobic Bioremediation

• Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation

HORIZONTAL DRILL:

• ISCO

• ISCR

• Bioaugmentation

• In Situ Sorption & Biodegradation

• Enhanced Aerobic Bioremediation

• Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation

WELLS

• ISCO

• ISCR

• Sorption

• Enhanced Anaerobic Bioremediation

EXCAVATION

• Soil Mixing & Handling

Three core Technologiesfederal and state regulatory approved

Thank You!

Alana MillerRegenesis Northeast District Manageramiller@regenesis.com929-466-0300

Ryan MillerLand Science Northeast District Managerrmiller@landsciencetech.com201-388-0984